sing me back home

Although it isn't a book that I would pick up and read at my own leisure, I can see how someone with a deep heartfelt appreciation for music of any genre (not necessarily country) could read Sing Me Back Home and relate to the idea of certain songs and artists narrating one's daily life. Although I do love music, I personally can't relate to one music genre or artist setting the tone for my entire childhood, and perhaps it's that fact that makes reading Sing Me Back Home a difficult task for me to undertake. However, while I may not necessarily agree, I can certainly appreciate both the undeniable outpour of pure emotion that Jennings  has penned in his autobiography, as well as the unique writing style of a comprehensive country music guidebook infused with humorous and jolting personal anecdotes. 

Catching up #4(Last one, Bookseller of Kabul)

I think that Bookseller is really effective in showing not just that women are oppressed, but that women are REALLY oppressed in her country. It makes all other life struggles seem trivial compared to the daunting task of trying to overcome something to deep rooted as the Muslim way of life. She really goes out of her way to dehumanize the woman to the farthest extent. What particular struck me was her use of synechdoche. She dehumanizes the women to the point where they are nothing more than "burqas." The Burqa is a symbol of oppression, of inequality and of similarity. The women are closed off from the rest of society, all made to look the same, but different from the men. It makes them stand out, but all look the exact same. The Burqa takes away all that amkes them unique and human, their facial features and expressions. It's truly a devastating image that the author uses to shock the reader and expose the horrible conditions that women are forced to live under.

Catching up #3 (Anythign English)

I know it's totally late to be talking about the appeal of the androgynous man, but I'm going to any way. I think it was a really ineffective peace.Gross starts out her essay with a false promise. Her first 2 lines seem to hint that a personal anecdote will follow, but none ensues, thus making the audience skeptical of her writing. She proceeds to describe a lot of qualities without making any connection to her reader, just a simple list. She has a purely factual tone which eliminates most appeal to pathos and thus lessens the effectiveness of the work. She then continues to generalize about all men, thus making any male reader feel, frankly, like crap. She says that all men are pretty much brutes who only care about beer and pretzels. It is full of sweepy generalizations that detract from the ethos of the work. The piece seems to be a scathing review of men in general with no personal stories, no wringer to hook the audience, just a list. If she can be this critical of men, I can be this critical of her list of qualities.

Catching up #2 (First they killed my father)

I know all the close readings are in and the book is done with, but my blog account was not working for a while. So i think that in First They Killed My Father, Ung uses her rhetoric purely to show the insights of a scared child. While most people imagine something happier, Ung continues to stay trapped in her imagined scenes. These scenes provide insight and establish a connection with the audience. She lets them into her world, into her thoughts. This is very effective because the audience feels important and connected to the writer. In the scenes that she imagines, she imagines death and strife, not the usual escapist thoughts that most would imagine. She uses scenes that would only prove how trapped she is. Not only does her imagery convey this, but so does her diction. She uses words that covey a sense of hopelessness and entrapment. "My mind chases me." her sentences are brief and crisp in order to show the brevity of the situation, how she only has a moment to reflect.

Sing me back home!

So I'm a bit late to submit this, but I think that the best aspect of Sing me Back home is the connection that the author forms with the audience. He's constantly using italicized words in order to put an emphasis on them. When he says "Listen!" the word physically stands out from the rest of the page, thus making the reader see it very clearly. It's obviously something that he wants them to pay attention to. By doing this, he creates a very strong and authoritative voice that the reader is obligated to listen to. However, this does not only make him credible, it also engages the reader in the text and makes him/her feel important and involved. This device makes the audience feel more connected and the book can not relate on a more personal not than most memoirs.When a reader feels more engaged on that personal level, the following text is definitely going to hit closer to home.

So far we have read three books, The Bookseller of Kabul, First They Killed My Father, and the "Country Music" book Sing Me Back Home, and of all the three First They Killed My Father was my favorite. What put this book above the other was the response that I had. No genocide is not a familiar subject to me that I can personally relate to, but the emotions Ung describes in her novel are easy to understand and vaguely parallel to hypothetical scenarios (i.e. losing a sibling or parent). On the contrary, in Sing Me Back Home, i can't make parallels to country music. However this doesn't create a barrier disabling my perception of Jennings' purpose throughout the novel. Music, no matter what genre, is expressed through it tone and most importantly lyrics. The lyrics of songs serve as the backbone and foundation of most music. And lyrics are decoded to tell stories and express emotion. This is what Jennings is basically doing, using his stories as lyrics to create the "ultimate" country song. Mentioning other country songs and country artists could also serve as helping to guide his story (country song).

sorry that this post is somewhat jumbled.

Reaction to classmate post

            I think that it should be okay to expose the issues in one family and give them problems in order to expose the problems of an entire people. It is okay for both historians and journalists to do this because there are instances where this is the only way to shine a light on some problem in society. The basic question here is do the problems of many outweigh the problems of one, and the answer is that they absolutely do. Although the bookseller himself might not like this, Seierstad had apparently helped a large amount of Afghan women. With regards to the limits of documentary and fiction, I believe that if you cannot add specific facts with evidence and proof to back them up, and if you aren’t drawing on secondhand stories and narrators with personal bias, then and only then you can call you work documentary or nonfiction. If you present ideas or stories that cannot be substantiated by something concrete, you have to call your work fiction.

Description in Bookseller

            I think that it should be okay to expose the issues in one family and give them problems in order to expose the problems of an entire people. It is okay for both historians and journalists to do this because there are instances where this is the only way to shine a light on some problem in society. The basic question here is do the problems of many outweigh the problems of one, and the answer is that they absolutely do. Although the bookseller himself might not like this, Seierstad had apparently helped a large amount of Afghan women. With regards to the limits of documentary and fiction, I believe that if you cannot add specific facts with evidence and proof to back them up, and if you aren’t drawing on secondhand stories and narrators with personal bias, then and only then you can call you work documentary or nonfiction. If you present ideas or stories that cannot be substantiated by something concrete, you have to call your work fiction.

Bookseller Controversy

            I think that it should be okay to expose the issues in one family and give them problems in order to expose the problems of an entire people. It is okay for both historians and journalists to do this because there are instances where this is the only way to shine a light on some problem in society. The basic question here is do the problems of many outweigh the problems of one, and the answer is that they absolutely do. Although the bookseller himself might not like this, Seierstad had apparently helped a large amount of Afghan women. With regards to the limits of documentary and fiction, I believe that if you cannot add specific facts with evidence and proof to back them up, and if you aren’t drawing on secondhand stories and narrators with personal bias, then and only then you can call you work documentary or nonfiction. If you present ideas or stories that cannot be substantiated by something concrete, you have to call your work fiction.

First they killed my father

            First they killed my father was a great book to read. One thing I really liked was that her writing was easy to understand. The everything was pretty brief and to the point, which helped the book flow better. The one thing that really jumped out to me was at the beginning of the book how quickly her life changed. She was not someone who was previously living in poverty or someone who didn’t live in the modern world. Her family was middle class, her father had an important position, and her life from day to day was stable. But in the blink of an eye all of that disappeared and she had to go through an impossible ordeal. This stuck out to me because I could see myself in her situation at the start of the novel, but I could not imagine what it was like to lose every material thing I had in a matter of a day. Another thing that really made the novel great were the imaginary sections. They were so effective at putting the audience into a situation because they were extremely descriptive and contained vivid imagery. Even though all of these stories were not actually witnessed by Ung herself, her vivid description of events built ethos; I trusted everything she said in those sections. The imaginary sections allowed me to put myself right into the situation and into the shoes of whoever she happened to be talking about.  

            First let me start of by saying I really, really hate country music. I do not understand what people see in it, I can’t listen to it without dying a little inside. The beginning of the book is not very riveting; in fact, I had to struggle to keep reading the book. But although I don’t particularly find the book interesting, I do like the way that he integrates various country songs and artists into the novel. He uses country to parallel what goes on in his life and what goes on in rural America. He shows how country music paints a real image of the lives of rural Americans. I think this is an original strategy, and I think if you were into country music, the book would appeal to you more. The book did help me have a greater appreciation for country music though. I can see how important and influential it was for him, and how important it must be for millions of other people who grew up like him. That said, I still don’t like the music.

Conflicting Feelings About Sing Me Back Home

I feel like Jennings' book can be divided into two types of writing: the fluid, flowing poetic style that he employs to describe his life in the country and the heavy, sluggish lists of country music titles and singers. When mixed, the occasional reference to a famous song or singer meshes well with the other sounds, sights, and events the author. However, when he launches on a page long list of song titles and country singers, I immediately become a unattached and disinterested reader. Despite the heavy focus on his "country" heritage, I find his prose to be extremely skillful and the rhythm of his writing addictive. However, my interest and admiration for his skill wanes at the mention of another ten or fifteen writers and singers that I don't know about. I think that if these types of writing that are apparent in his novel were more cohesive, this memoir would retain my interest more effectively. 

Impressions on Country Spiritualism

One of the things that has made an impression on me most from reading Sing Me Back Home has been Jennings development of spiritualism surrounding the music in his life. Devoting such reverence to Johnny Cash and other artists like him is almost like giving them sainthood in his eyes. Even his diction in reference to them changes, almost as if they're too good to be real. I was really surprised that Jennings would put this much faith in a musical artist or song. The book was prefaced for me by several classmates indicating that "[the book] was terrible because it talked about country music", and I expected some reference or parallels, but not with this much fervor. I'm enjoying the book even more with this newly "enlightened" understanding of Jennings's view on the artists that shaped his childhood

Lost in Country Music

In the first few pages of Jenning's book, I became lost in a sea of unfamiliar comparisons, references, and music. I feel that an author ought to engage his reader, take his reader along for the journey through the book; however, I feel as if I am an outsider looking into a world that is unfamiliar and strange to me. Although not every book, whether novel, short story, or biography, relates to the specific "world" we live in, something about it draws us in and resonates with us. It is what keeps us engaged. In Jenning's book, that something isn't quite there. I feel completely isolated from this little "country-music-lovin'" world, and the book doesn't make me interested in this world either. This book is written for someone, but it's not me. Maybe this is because I can't relate to the story at all, but I think Jennings changes his tone too often. As he switches from a history lesson on country music to his experiences in rural New Hampshire, his tone transforms from formal, historian-like, to real, uncensored, "country." Maybe this is another reason I find it hard to relate to and become engaged in. 

Books about Genocide

I'm going to backtrack a little to Ung's "First They Killed My Father." It made me think of other books we've read about genocide, like "What is the What?" When comparing the two, I immediately recall Ung's skillful manipulation of description and specific details that I enjoyed. I think I'm able to remember Ung's story more clearly because it was paced expertly, keeping the reader captivated and involved. I was able to read the book in pretty much one sitting (on an airplane). When I think about "What is the What" I cannot even remember what the "what" was. I remember the joyous feeling I had when I managed to escape failure on a plot quiz. I remember feeling like the book was endless, especially when the protagonist was going through the desert. While the style of writing really made the reader FEEL like they were traveling through an endless desert, I constantly found myself tuning out. Like in "the Bookseller of Kabul," the author of "What is the What" didn't narrate historical explanations very well. I think the length of Ung's story intensified the pathos that the text evoked in me because I felt like the characters were being torn from the story. This was a pretty unorganized rant but my point: Ung's story about genocide was more effective than that of "what is the what." 

All About Subject Matter

I've been thinking about what makes any given reader like the book they are reading. Like Rob, i think it comes down (quite obviously) to what the central theme of the book is. In the case of "Sing Me Back Home," from reading posts I can see that many people find themselves in direct conflict with the focus of the novel: country music. This can prevent them from ENJOYING the novel, but i don't think it has to stop them from appreciating what Jennings has to say. I think what is going to help me through the dense country music portions of the book will be the deep appreciation i have for Jennings passion for music and his rhetorical skill. When I prevent myself from overanalyzing some of his rather grand statements, I find myself enjoying the dramatic flair of his writing. Chapter One concludes with, "I will tell you why it's my music, but also why its emotion-drenched wisdom also belongs to you, belongs to all of this." The dramatic repetition at the end of this line is encourages me to continue reading, even though I'm not particularly enthused about the core of the book. 

Jennings and Country Music

I've heard a lot of negative comments about Jennings's book. The interesting thing about these comments is that few of them are about the way he rights or about his rhetoric. Most of them are simply about the subject matter: country music. I think that a lot of people had problems getting into the memoir simply because the subject matter is dense and, for some, hard to relate to. As for me, I really enjoy this memoir. Reason? I really enjoy country music. So when I read Jennings's thoughts on Johnny Cash's first album and Hank Williams and other country music staples, I can't help be interested. I think that this says a lot about what people want out of their reading material. In the end, the readers must be interested in the subject matter. Some people loathe the very core of country music. Those people may very well loathe the very core of Jennings's memoir. That's just how it goes.

Dana Jennings

I think that my favorite part of Dana Jenning's book so far is the way that he uses description. For example, in the first chapter when he describes his background he uses a number of images to help the reader identify with an upbringing/ lifestyle that they may be unfamiliar with like "record ripe with country darkness." I also thought that the analysis of Johnny Cash's "I Walk the Line" was really great, because it showed how someone who didn't have a country upbringing might interpret a country song differently, that the people who have real country roots get more out of the music than those who listen to it purely because its on the top 100 hit list. 

reactions to jennings book

i feel like i shouldn't say this because we have a connection to the author, but i don't really like this book. i think its interesting when he talks about his family, but the long stretches of analysis of country music is just not interesting to me. i find it very repetitive and like i'm getting better acquainted with Johnny Cash than Dana Jennings.
what i do like about this is that the writing style makes me think in a country accent. it's very distinct however it does make it dense and hard to read at times.

Sing Me Back Home Reactions

I started the book after most people and had already heard how difficult it was to get through. While I admit I am still in the beginning and not finding the specific references too fascinating, the content connects to large enough themes that to a certain degree, I can relate. I found the extended metaphor opening work to intrigue the reader, but left a lot up to interpretation. Being pretty ignorant in the field of country music, I was hoping for a more clear cut, explanatory introduction. However, what I got was something better. By page 20 I understood completely the appeal of country music, not through his passion, but through his ability to relate it to a certain lifestyle and a certain identity. I feel one of the most powerful statements was that country music could provide such amazing escapism: "for a few minutes you could forget that you were a few months behind on the rent and that the light company was threatening to shut the electric" (12). The strength of country music comes through in this passage. Although country music doesn't have this amazing effect on all of us, most of us have a favorite weekly television show that we allow ourselves to get completely sucked into until we forget reality. While country music is more in tune with specific communities and cultures, the idea of desperation and escapism is universal.

Love, Death and Country Music

In Jenning's novel, he describes a force that has raised him, has defined him... one that identifies him while simultaneously instilling a pride in his people, and uniting them through a common love. It was easier for me to read this book without thinking of that "force" as the country music that I know -- the somewhat goofy, bucktoothed cartoon-like figure playing a broken banjo. Thus, instead of hearing the "twang" of actual country music while I was reading, I heard the "twang" of Jenning's voice: the voice he tried to give country music, to legitimize it in the eyes of others, and to bring people to understand that it is much more than "hick".

The amount of pride that Jennings writes with, combined with the fact that his prose reads like lyrics and has a "hymnlike hum" itself, made it easy to hear Jenning's unique voice.

I haven't finished the book, but I haven't yet been convinced of Jenning's argument. I think the thing that bothers most of us is that Jennings is trying to make us all identify with country music, trying to argue that it is inherently American and thus applies to all of us. This is hard for me to believe mainly because I think country musics isolation is its main source of power.

It reminded me of my mother's family -- they were all born and raised in Jamaica. You can always tell when we have family over because true country Reggae will surely be playing (not the kind anyone would ever hear on the radio -- the kind only people who have lived in the country would have heard). The fact that most can't identify it, that most don't understand its lyrics, makes it more unifying for us. We find power in the fact that only we can understand it. I feel like country music has the same sort of power, that although Jennings is spending time trying to make us relate, and translating this genre for us, we will never truly understand. And I think that's ok.

Sing Me Back Home

Well, I don't want to speak for anyone but myself but having read some of the other blogs, it appears that the common consensus is indicates that most of us are struggling to feel connected to the text. Certainly for me, establishing a connection with this book has been challenging. I think it was easy for us to throw ourselves into the readily emotional prose of First They Killed My Father--Ung's simple, passionate honesty made it easy to feel as though we were a part of the action, although the situation she presented to us is something wholly alien to most American high schoool students like ourselves. But at the same time, Jennings offers us what seems to be a story into which his emotions are equally as invested, and about a situation (rural New Hampshire and country music) that, however ironically, I know less than I do about the Cambodian genocide. It strikes me as odd that It was so easy for me to become enveloped in Ung's description of a foreign country but I feel as though I'm an outsider looking in on Jennings' account of somethign that's actually a large part of my own country's culture.

Country Music..?

ok, it is very difficult to trudge through a list of country songs and artists most of us aren't very familiar with. i have this feeling that what jennings is doing with his name dropping is some sort of intricate, marvelous weaving of country music, rural life in New Hampshire, poverty - yet when I don't recognize the threads, how can I appreciate the art? 

It's not only the country music references that are hard to pick up - it's the whole lifestyle behind those lyrics that none of us at MKA can understand completely. 

But in the realm of rhetoric- where we've learned to look through content and into the strategy and devices, I think jennings really stands out. The tone is unlike anything we've seen - the academic analysis mixed with slang and colloquialisms? That's pretty rare. The use of definition is apparent - in a way, the book is an extended definition of country music - and all its facets - love, death, poverty, working life. Illustration, alliteration, it's all there, and it's easy to see when what he is actually saying is going over my head. 

My post isn't working.... so sorry if this comes up 7 different times.

Reading this book was not necessarily something I was "dying" to do. I didn't feel that I could relate personally to anything that Jenning's was writing about. I didn't grow up in the rural mountains, I grew up in a suburb 14 miles from NYC. I've fortunately never experienced the Great Depression, while Jenning's swears that it consumed his childhood. Most importantly, I didn't grow up listening to country music--I knew all the lyrics to "Genie in a Bottle" by the time I was 8.

But reading everyone elses posts, I could see that I was not alone.

It was really unsettling to me that I couldn't relate to anything that Jenning's was writing about. When my Nana visited me at my horse show this weekend, she asked me what I was reading in school. When I told her about my "situation", she laughed. Little did I know what my family background really was and how much I could, in fact, relate to Jenning's writing.

What I found out was that my ancestors on the Asher side of my family came over to explore the US with Daniel Boone. This same group settled in rural Kentucky, where we still have relatives living today. My dad used to go to his cousins' house in Kentucky and ride their horses bareback through the wooded mountains. My Nana would recall the family poker games that would always get out of control and sometimes ended with a toothless family member.

Now hold on, could this really be my family? The stereotypical deep southern folk who loved their whiskey, cards and country music?

So I stepped back to reevaluate what I had read. What I found was rather interesting. The language was not particularly my taste- the context wasn't either. And honestly, hearing how closely my family was related to Jenning's story didn't change anything for me and my connection I felt with the book. What I could relate to, however, was the truth I found in Dana Jenning's words. His conviction was evident and unswayed throughout the entire book, and if I didn't necessarily agree with what he was saying, I never found myself disagreeing with Jenning's personal beliefs. I guess when you get down to it it doesn't matter about the context of the writing, but the believe in one's words that really can create a connection between an author and his audience.

Country Music

Reading this book was not necessarily something I was "dying" to do. I didn't feel that I could relate personally to anything that Jenning's was writing about. I didn't grow up in the rural mountains, I grew up in a suburb 14 miles from NYC. I've fortunately never experienced the Great Depression, while Jenning's swears that it consumed his childhood. Most importantly, I didn't grow up listening to country music--I knew all the lyrics to "Genie in a Bottle" by the time I was 8.

But reading everyone elses posts, I could see that I was not alone.

It was really unsettling to me that I couldn't relate to anything that Jenning's was writing about. When my Nana visited me at my horse show this weekend, she asked me what I was reading in school. When I told her about my "situation", she laughed. Little did I know what my family background really was and how much I could, in fact, relate to Jenning's writing.

What I found out was that my ancestors on the Asher side of my family came over to explore the US with Daniel Boone. This same group settled in rural Kentucky, where we still have relatives living today. My dad used to go to his cousins' house in Kentucky and ride their horses bareback through the wooded mountains. My Nana would recall the family poker games that would always get out of control and sometimes ended with a toothless family member.

Now hold on, could this really be my family? The stereotypical deep southern folk who loved their whiskey, cards and country music?

So I stepped back to reevaluate what I had read. What I found was rather interesting. The language was not particularly my taste- the context wasn't either. And honestly, hearing how closely my family was related to Jenning's story didn't change anything for me and my connection I felt with the book. What I could relate to, however, was the truth I found in Dana Jenning's words. His conviction was evident and unswayed throughout the entire book, and if I didn't necessarily agree with what he was saying, I never found myself disagreeing with Jenning's personal beliefs. I guess when you get down to it it doesn't matter about the context of the writing, but the believe in one's words that really can create a connection between an author and his audience.

A Few Different Thoughts on Jennings' Book

As I've seen is similar by reading others' blogs, I was not pulled in by anything about Love, Death, and Country Music. Nothing seemed to appeal to me, not the title, the subject, the prologue, or the beginning of the book. I was so turned off after reading the first ten pages that I did not pick up the book again for more than a week. Because of this, I'm still not that far in the text, yet I have gotten further into it and now have a greater and somewhat different reaction. Yes, as most others have said, I do not particularly enjoy country music either, but I don't hate it. I mean I think I like some soft country music. For me, it was not only the complete focus on country music and just country music which caused me to immediately dislike the book, but also the writing style. I am bothered not as much by the country music aspect of it as by the way he discusses country music. However, these are all just my personal reactions so far and I still fully understand his purpose and goals in writing this. I appreciate the risk he took in writing such a different and personal piece, and I also know I have to read more before I create a more complete opinion. On this more positive note, I like Jennings' use of rhetoric. I've noticed a number of techniques including alliteration, illustration, metaphor, and more generally, comparison. However, I have trouble understanding his reasoning behind these strategies. It's hard for me to understand his rhetoric and determine why and what effect he intends to create by including this language. Maybe because I haven't been able to connect with the writing as much as I would have liked to, I haven't been able to find the link between his rhetoric and his meaning.

Beyond Country Music

Although I was not "hooked" within the first 20 pages of the novel, and haven't found it particularly "interesting", once I look past my personal views, I can assess, and truly understand Jennings methods. His continuing list of country songs serves to represent certain episodes in both America and his life. He is able to speak about something that he finds so close to him, and relate it to his life. Although I am not familiar with his "country singer name dropping" throughout the book, what I can take from it, is that this genre of music means much more to him than guitars and lyrics. His style (in terms of his rant about country music) can be compared to any writer who has written a story and connected it to an object or sport that they love. Jennings shouldn't be judged on what he parallels his life and American events to (country music), but should be judged on the effectiveness of his writing style. Yes his ongoing prose about Johnny Cash and other country singers may get annoying, but he is able to clearly illustrate his stories and the story of growing America, I find it very interesting that he is able to find connections between country songs and these topics.

I wish I liked country...

I really wish I liked country. If I liked country music, I would think that Jennings creates a literary masterpiece embodying the essence of the country genre of music. I would revel in his fluid style of writing, absorbing and wholly appreciating the lyrical quality to his prose that is saturated with alliteration, consonance and the pervasive feeling that the memoir belongs to the genre of country music itself. I would recognize and admire his cleverly-placed references to famous country pieces and musicians, my heart would squeeze faithfully every time I saw the word "Cash," and I would be able to pretend that I myself had grown up in the 1960's running and singing barenaked as a child and chasing dogs away from chicken coops.

Sadly, though -- I don't.

I think I get it. Jennings' memoir is a song in its own right: a compilation of hundreds of references to songs and musicians that can only exhibit a unique sound as a single entity if the smaller bits resonate individually. I feel that in order to truly appreciate the novel, the reader would have to inwardly sound the majority of Jennings' references to the country music of forty years ago so that his memoir could resonate as a whole. I really do wish I was familiar with the hundreds of song references that Jennings draws from to compose his novel, but because I'm not, I can't ever truly appreciate Jennings' memoir for the masterpiece that it probably is.

Love, Death and Country Music

I'm not that far into the book so I can't give a full judgment on it but so far I don't find it particularly grabbing. The books that I find the most appealing sort of pull me in from the beginning. For example, "First They Killed My Father" opened with a vivid description of Phnom Penh, and then Ung transitioned to more specific details about her family. I immediately felt pulled into the scene and interested. In Jennings' book, I found less of an initial pull. I found myself struggling to see the story through all the drawn out descriptions of the country music. So far, I find that the numerous sections dedicated to country music's history cause me to lose focus and do not inspire me to keep reading. Maybe someone who is very interested in country music would enjoy this book more, and be able to relate to it in a way that I can't. From reading the comments of others I see that this sentiment is shared and as I keep reading I'm going to take the advice of Michelle (I think it was her) and try to skip the boring descriptions so I can try to understand the story more.

ughh country music..

I HATE country music. When I first read the title of the book, Love, Death, and COuntry Music,  I HATE country music. When I first read the title of the book, Love, Death, and Country Music, I thought the 3 words had no significance when placed together. I thought the author had just chosen 3 random words, used them a few times in his novel, so as to simply draw attention to his book. The 'creative' title, and the artistic cover would draw attention to his novel nonetheless. Honestly, when I started reading the first two chapters, I was bored. I REALLY REALLY don't like country music, and had no idea what he was talking about half the time. At first, I thought it would be best to look up some of the songs and artists he refers to, but it would take way too long. I didn't really understand why he added so much detail about the music in the beginning. I feel like he could've explained his background and values without so much extra boring fluff. After waking up various times with the book on my face, I realized I kept stopping in the same spot. I decided to skip that section and come back to it later, and it worked. I got past the first 2 chapters and finally noticed the diction and the purpose behind his descriptive writing. So far, it's not that bad. I can't wait to keep reading and see what other surprises he has for the readers.

Maybe I would understand it better in French...

When I started reading this book, I honestly felt like I was reading the Rosetta Stone. The country music references, lack of grammar or punctuation, and incessant mentioning of Johnny Cash were totally overwhelming. I would normally associate this style of writing with novels about the Civil War (i.e. Huckleberry Finn) or perhaps Reconstructionist southerners. NEVER would I imagine this literature with any place north of Maryland or east of Ohio. But, sure enough, here it is.

Perhaps this is Jennings' point: the idea of the least likely thing in the least likely place. His relationship to music clearly propels him throughout the novel, some metaphors and allusions seem more fitting than others. Yet, he makes all of these associations as a caucasian male from New Hampshire. You look at the cover of the book and think it's going to be about some country music fanatic and/or artist. But no. He's an educated writer living (currently) in suburbia. Don't judge a book (even one about country music) by its cover.

So far, my favorite part of Jennings' novel is "Hillbilly Fever," in which he makes paragraphs worth of metaphors relating country music to horseshoes, Johnny Cash (of course), two-stepping rats, and poverty-stricken existentialists. He breaks up this dense yet poetic diction with "Are you listening?" or "Listen!" These interruptions either shock the reader (as they did for me when I first read this passage because I felt my eyes glazing over the words) or they simply remind the audience of what they're reading, and of course, that they should pay attention. Many of these allusions come back later in the book.

The first few chapters were rough to get into and actually begin reading, but I think his diction and figurative language are amazing. I am no fan of country music (unless you count the Dixie Chicks), but Jennings really does, in my opinion, convey the impact of country music on his life to his audience effectively. Does he do it efficiently? That remains to be seen...

WE GET IT ALREADY!

One of my greatest pet peeves has to be when a writer believes that his or her audience lacks intelligence. I understand that there is a certain stereotype about Americans—that for all the power and money we have, we're simply not as smart as we think. But I think that many writers don't give their audience enough credit, believing that their readers won’t be able to understand certain metaphors or deeper meanings. I love writers like Fitzgerald and Golding that force you to dig into the book to pull out the message.

Jennings' book leaves me no ground to dig. He presents this metaphor comparing country music to his own life right out in the open, in the prologue, and leaves you wondering, what else is there for me to look for? And he drills in this "core message" throughout the entire novel, as if we as an audience were unable to make the connection. Frankly, this book did not "grab" me—it made me a passive reader rather than an active one. 

On a separate note, I believe Jennings also alienates his audience. I felt that I couldn't see myself in his story because I’m not Southern. As Joe said, I don't know anything about country music, and thus, instead of feeling at "home" in Jennings' story, I felt like an outsider. While Jennings book did leave me interested in learning more about country music, it left me with little else.

Say Johnny Cash one more time...

While Jennings clearly cared whole-heartedly about country music and its significance in history and present day, I could not force myself to evoke the same connection or relationship to this seemingly foreign world and music. The audience of his book is someone at least vaguely familiar with the genre, and if an expert reads this book, he or she will be able to extract much more than a novice to the country lifestyle will. Perhaps my age or upbringing has generated too great of a schism between his "Southern" poverty found in New Hampshire and my personal life for me to gain anything from what he attempted to explain. Whatever the reason, the repetition of the same few great country singers over and over again for novices such as myself were enough to make the first 20 pages almost unbearable. I even tried to play some Johnny Cash I had on my iPod to attempt some feeble understanding and relationship to the music, but nothing worked. In the suburbs of NYC, we are physically ignorant of the lifestyle he depicts and therefore the personal stories are the only effective element in his book that evoke pathos from the reader. The anecdotes create a personal feel and allowed me to imagine how I would feel if I lived in a similar situation and needed an escape. I gleaned a greater figurative understanding of the significance of country music in the lives of those in the poor rural south.

I will forever be biased

I despise country music. I have since before i can remember and i doubt it will change any time soon. I can see how if i put this deep and abiding hatred aside for the times i sit and read Sing Me Back Home, the book might be able to speak to me a bit more, since music is a gigantic part of my life and i completely understand why Jennings makes such an effort to try and ingrain into his audience's head that it can help shape our lives. But i just could not seem to get past the fact that the majority of this book was about country music. Just getting through the first couple pages was a struggle for me, and the personal anecdotes, which are few and strewn completely randomly throughout the book, were the easiest sections for me to get through, and considering their subject matter that should not be the case. I understand how his use of pathos is amplified by helping to relate a huge part of his life and the lives of his family to ours through our emotional connection to music, but the overall effect started off at a severe disadvantage with me, seeing as a large portion of my family thoroughly enjoys country music, and i've already spent a good part of my life learning to tune out their attempts to convert me. Jennings makes a valiant effort to subtly convince me of its merits, and its surprisingly wide range of members and their backgrounds, as well as the power of their lyrics. But while i come away from this book certainly with a more well rounded education in the history of country music, i remain the same in my abhorrence of the genre. In addition, while the personal aspects of Sing Me Back Home were obviously powerful and moving, the lack of consistency and the fact that they often seemed to take a back seat to the musical aspect of the book never really let me connect emotionally to the author or the book in general.

A World Foreign to My Own

Having just read Ung's scintillating memoir about her struggle in Cambodia, I expected Jennings' Sing Me Back Home to be much of the same. As I began to read his memoir, I felt like I was being forced into a world foreign to my own. A world that relied on a different language for communication. A world, for me, that was lost in translation. While Jennings' dialect relies strongly on his relation with country music, my own relies on the hip liberal scene of present day America. I was never able to begin to be able to fully understand the meaning of his descriptions telling me how much country music drives the life of his people. From my perspective, the only country music I have heard was some song "Jesus take the wheel",  a Rascal Flatts hit or two, and a few of Johnny Cash's famous number one hits. However, other than that, I have never entered the country music realm. I honestly feel like it comes from a different world, to a certain degree. 

In turn, the fact that I have no real relation with country music resulted in my inability to connect with Jennings' book. I felt that on every page he opened up a different argument and then tried to prove it with examples from country music [I know this is obvious but I am restating it because after thirty pages I was already, figuratively dying]. There was no break, just argument after argument after argument. His writing style really impeded my ability to read the book with any ease.

However, I urge that everyone give the utmost respect to Jennings because he took a huge risk in writing this book. I am sure that not many people have written a book about their lives through examples from country music, and I do not think many people will do this in the future. Jennings was "man-enough" to take a risk and I tip my hat off to him for that. 

A new way of looking at it

Ok, so this one hasn't been as easy as I expected it to be. I mean, yes I like it when writers write in a more colloquial language.. but really? It took me a while to get past, better yet get used to, all of the country music references... every paragraph, every sentence, ever word >.<... I've never really been a fan of country music (honestly the last full length country song I listened to was in the car with my Pennsylvania cousins.. it was about some guy that shot his wife because she didn't like the fact that he was going fishing-- a story he was telling his "hound"... needless to say its not my favorite song). But Jennings's book is causing me to gain growing appreciation for the affect (okay, okay how it elicits Pathos) of country music: what it influences and what it is derived from, how it is an intimate part of many people's lives, no maybe how it is life itself to many people. I guess I never took country music seriously, but that's wrong considering what music is to me: air, water, blood; if my music can be such a part of me then I shouldn't have discounted what it is to other people, to each his own. Jennings has been telling me about the air he breathes, the water he drinks, and the blood in his veins: country music. It is to him what my music is to me, so my remedy is reading it how I would listen to it. His country music.. maybe my jazz, my classical, my R&B. His Johnny Cash.. my Ella Fitzgerald, my Sonny Rollins, my Stevie Wonder, my Denise Graves. I would be doing Jennings and his work no justice if I didn't make it mean to me what it means to him.

I'll Never Like Country (And That's Just Fine)

When I first learned that one of the books we read in this course was a part memoir, part music history, I was pretty excited. When I learned it was about country music, though, my feelings changed. I'm not in anyway a fan of country music and probably never will be. However, I began reading the book and started to realize that my views of the genre as a whole were skewed. I learned that country music does not just come from the south, that country fans lived all over the country and that female country singers were just as emotional and rough as their male counterparts. Any false preconceived notion I had of country music was shot down by Jennings. The mini biographies Jennings' gives of the musicians and his breakdown of the lyrics helped me understand the deeper meaning behind the music and what country really was. All in all, he is really successful on describing a certain topic and giving examples to further present his views. Jennings' rhetoric reminds me of Hurston's in "Their Eyes Were Watching God."Hurston uses sophisticated description as well as a Southern language to beautifully tell her story. While Jennings definitely makes an attempt to mix his sophisticated English and country voice, it utimately fails. There is no distinct break between the two, thus taking away from his book.

While "Sing Me Back Home" is definitely successful in teaching about country music, its origin and its true meaning, I sadly say that I feel in no way connected to this book. I don't think its badly written or that its unenjoyable, its just that I can't really connect to the whole musical aspect. For example, "Killing Yourself to Live: 85% of a True Story" by Chuck Klosterman is an easy book for me to connect to because its all about rock music, a genre I actually listen to. Had "Sing Me Back Home" been about a genre I enjoy, I might not have learned as much but I might have enjoyed the book more.

Until i read this novel, I never truly realized the power music has, especially country music. Nevertheless, Jennings was able to give me a deeper appreciation of country music, and the influence it had on its millions of impoverished listeners. Country music gave poor rural Americans songs to cry, laugh, and drink to. In "Sing Me Back Home" Jennings is able to show how every aspect of life in rural America, be it good or bad, can be found in country music. Whether it be the pain from being hit by your drunken father, or the thrill of strock car racing, or any other multitude of feelings, it can all be found in country music. Consequently it is this ability to relate to its listeners that makes country music so powerful. Country music provides that shoulder to cry on or that friend to laugh with to many of its lonely fans. Jennings is able to show how almost all of the hopes, fears, and everyday life of an entire subgroup of people can be found in country music. During the 1950s and 1960s counrty music was not concerned with selling albums and making profits, instead many country artists merely wanted to tell the story of the hard working Americans who were not able to enjoy the post World War II prosperity that so many other Americans were able to experience.

Country Music's Purpose

Until I read this book, a song represented nothing more to me than a mood or a specific event the artist sang about. The deepest lyrics I had ever listened to were probably about one of the singer's tough break-ups. And as for country music, to me it was happy, simple songs about life on the farm. Before reading "Sing Me Back Home," I definitely underestimated the power of a song, especially country songs.
Jennings opened my eyes to the ability of a song to sing not only to your current mood, but also to your lifetime expereinces, the experiences that shape who you are. As he paralleled various country songs with his life, I realized how central they were to his identity, and the identity of others with his lifestyle. They not only got a struggling, angry man through the day, but they also served as a testament to everything he lived through and died for.
Jennings connected the lyrics of each song to a common aspect of country life. However, one of his most powerful and effective strategies to relate country music with country life is his telling of the artists' lives. Suddenly the lyrics become more than rhymes, they epitomize the life of the singer as well as the lives of the listeners. Jennings shows us that country singers are really just musically talented country boys and girls.
This book truly showed me how ignorant I was about music and especially country music. While it was difficult to get through at times for a reader who has never listened to more country than Taylor Swift, it was definitely worth reading and his message was worth learning.

Learning from Jennings

Anyone who knows me knows that I take ridiculous notes (probably way too exact and comprehensive). This book was really hard for me too take notes on. I spent 3 boring days trying to just get through the first 20 pages. First of all, nothing made sense to me. Jennings referred to a thousand different songs and mentioned Johnny Cash about 15 times in a sentence. I was frustrated because I could not put a tune in my head to match the songs that Jennings listed. Then, I put my pen down and STOPPED TAKING NOTES. I read quickly, not focusing on the foreign details, but rather focusing on the big picture that Jennings presented between country music and his life. Without knowing anything about country music, the references to songs and artists still helped me understand Jennings' connection to country music.

I have never listened to any country music, and I probably never will. It just does not appeal to me. I have never experienced poverty or the life that Jennings tags as a "Sh#t" lifestyle. But, by reading this book, I have arrived at a greater appreciation for music, artists, and listeners. The book beat the message into me. "Music is a form of expression for all types of people". Country appeals to Jennings because the music and his life are parallel lines. I like different music because other types of music coordinate with my life experiences.

To sum it up- I hated the book, but it taught me about Jennings, music, and life.

Our Music is Our Name

Country music is not just the collective noise of toothless, overall-clad hicks strumming out notes on beat-up banjos; it is the feeling and the emotion behind a forgotten community in post-World War II America. To some, it sounds like a nonsensical clatter of mismatched chords intended for the rednecks of the rural countryside; to others, it sounds like the voices, not of angels, but of other hardworking people who know the struggle endured by the listener. Over and over again, Jennings brings up the idea of being defined by music. Is there really a genre of tunes that can capture who we are in a matter of beats and measures? It is undeniable that music can affect how we feel in a moment (hence why people listen to pump-up music to get ready for a game, laid-back music to unwind after a long day, etc), but can our entire beings be wrapped up and performed on a musical scale? If so, what would it sound like? If our hearts were boom boxes and without thinking, we just hit play, what would we hear? The throbbing bass of techno, the measured swing of jazz, the back-breaking power of rock, the unfettered spirit of an instrumental solo? Or perhaps some mix of it all, some medium where the flow and finesse of a ballad meets the rigid and unrelenting pounding of a drum? Whatever we would sound like, the important point that Jennings makes is that we would all make noise. No matter how quiet someone might seem, no one is silent; no one has simply nothing to say. Like the forgotten country-loving society in which Jennings grew up, there is a sound for everyone. We simply have to listen.